This inspection took place on 10 September 2018 and was unannounced.

102b Brockhurst Road is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

102b Brockhurst Road accommodates up to four people with a learning disability in one adapted building. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support CQC policy and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the home.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good in Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led with an increase to a rating of outstanding in the key question Effective. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Staff were kind and caring, and people had their privacy and dignity upheld and promoted. We received consistently positive feedback which showed us that people were valued and respected.

We found a stimulating environment with a warm and welcoming atmosphere. People, staff and relatives had developed strong and mutually respectful relationships. Feedback we received about the service was very high. We saw positive interactions between people and staff and staff treated people with dignity and respect, anticipating their needs.

There was a thorough and coordinated approach to enable people to move on from the service to more independent living. The culture and ethos of the service meant staff recognised the importance of promoting independence and worked in partnership with people to achieve their potential. Staff found innovative and efficient ways to deliver more joined-up care and support to people using the service.

There was a strong community presence which led to many positive outcomes for people. Links with health and social care professionals were excellent. Staff recognised and understood the importance of ensuring that people experienced a high level of care and support that promoted their health and wellbeing. Relatives were extremely complimentary about the care and support received. It was clear from speaking with the registered manager, staff, relatives and comments from professionals that the provider was committed to achieving excellence in the provision of care.

Staff training was developed and delivered around the individual needs of people living at the service. Staff were exceptionally skilled and displayed enthusiasm and pride in their work. We saw the manager provided comprehensive levels of supervision and appraisal for staff. This resulted in a dedicated and motivated workforce. The management team recognised potential and invested in their staff. This empowered staff to support the people who used the service effectively.

Staff had been recruited following safe policies and procedures, and there were sufficient numbers of staff employed to make sure people received the support they needed.

Staff make sure that people are involved in decisions about their care so that their human and lega

This inspection took place on 29 October 2015 and was unannounced.

102b Brockhurst Road is registered to offer support and accommodation for up to four people with learning disabilities and or Autism. At the time of our inspection there were three people living at the home. People were accommodated in single rooms, with a shared lounge, kitchen, quiet room, dining room and an enclosed garden. Brockhurst Road is situated next to 102a Brockhurst Road and has the same manager and provider for both services, staff can be called upon from either house to assist if needed.

There was no registered manager in place, however the person in charge of the day to day running of the home has made an application to register and was registered until recently with us for another service run by the same provider.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are “registered persons”. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were appropriate processes and risk assessments in place to protect people from risks to their safety and wellbeing, including the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to recognise and report signs of abuse. Arrangements were in place to keep people safe and comfortable in the event of an emergency evacuation.

The manager made sure there were enough staff with the skills and knowledge to support people safely. Staff stored and administered medicines, including skin creams and ointments, safely. Medicines records, including for medicines prescribed “as required” were accurate and complete.

Staff had the knowledge they required to support people but the training and skills needed were not up to date. The manager had recognised this and a plan was in place to ensure all staff received training to update them.

Staff were aware of the need to obtain people’s consent. When people lacked capacity to make decisions staff were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The service provided individualised, varied and nutritious meals which were prepared and served according to people’s individual needs. People had access to their GP and other healthcare providers when needed.

Staff and the management team had received safeguarding training they were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s safeguarding policy and explain the action they would take if they identified any concerns.

People and staff told us they felt the service was well-led and were positive about the management team. The provider was proactive in promoting good practice, through supervisions and team meetings.

People told us and our observations confirmed that they felt the home was caring. Staff were enthusiastic about working with the people who lived at the home. They were sensitive to people’s individual needs treating them with dignity and respect, and developed caring and positive relationships with them. People were encouraged to maintain their family relationships.

People received care and treatment that met their needs and took into account their wishes and preferences. Staff delivered care and treatment in line with plans and assessments. The service had a procedure in place to manage complaints, but people had not felt the need to use it.

Staff supported people in a variety of individual activities, including trips outside the home and day care services.

People, their families and staff were all complimentary about the atmosphere and culture in the home. People expressed affection for the home and its staff. Staff expressed pride in the service provided, and described it as homely and well run.

The manager had an effective and organised management system. They had completed an audit of the home when they started work there and had developed an action plan. The service manager had also completed an audit and action plan and had found similar issues to be worked on. Work was underway to maintain the quality of the service and to communicate their priorities and values.

There was a thorough and wide ranging system of checks and audits to monitor and assess the quality of service. Actions arising from these checks were followed up.

This inspection took place on 29 October 2015 and was unannounced.

102b Brockhurst Road is registered to offer support and accommodation for up to four people with learning disabilities and or Autism. At the time of our inspection there were three people living at the home. People were accommodated in single rooms, with a shared lounge, kitchen, quiet room, dining room and an enclosed garden. Brockhurst Road is situated next to 102b Brockhurst Road and has the same manager and provider for both services, staff can be called upon from either house to assist if needed.

There was no registered manager in place, however the person in charge of the day to day running of the home has made an application to register and was registered until recently with us for another service run by the same provider.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are “registered persons”. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were appropriate processes and risk assessments in place to protect people from risks to their safety and wellbeing, including the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to recognise and report signs of abuse. Arrangements were in place to keep people safe and comfortable in the event of an emergency evacuation.

The manager made sure there were enough staff with the skills and knowledge to support people safely. Staff stored and administered medicines, including skin creams and ointments, safely. Medicines records, including for medicines prescribed “as required” were accurate and complete.

Staff had the knowledge they required to support people but the training and skills needed were not up to date. The manager had recognised this and a plan was in place to ensure all staff received training to update them.

Staff were aware of the need to obtain people’s consent. When people lacked capacity to make decisions staff were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The service provided individualised, varied and nutritious meals which were prepared and served according to people’s individual needs. People had access to their GP and other healthcare providers when needed.

Staff and the management team had received safeguarding training they were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s safeguarding policy and explain the action they would take if they identified any concerns.

People and staff told us they felt the service was well-led and were positive about the management team. The provider was proactive in promoting good practice, through supervisions and team meetings.

People told us and our observations confirmed that they felt the home was caring. Staff were enthusiastic about working with the people who lived at the home. They were sensitive to people’s individual needs treating them with dignity and respect, and developed caring and positive relationships with them. People were encouraged to maintain their family relationships.

People received care and treatment that met their needs and took into account their wishes and preferences. Staff delivered care and treatment in line with plans and assessments. The service had a procedure in place to manage complaints, but people had not felt the need to use it.

Staff supported people in a variety of individual activities, including trips outside the home and day care services.

People, their families and staff were all complimentary about the atmosphere and culture in the home. People expressed affection for the home and its staff. Staff expressed pride in the service provided, and described it as homely and well run.

The manager had an effective and organised management system. They had completed an audit of the home when they started work there and had developed an action plan. The service manager had also completed an audit and action plan and had found similar issues to be worked on. Work was underway to maintain the quality of the service and to communicate their priorities and values.

There was a thorough and wide ranging system of checks and audits to monitor and assess the quality of service. Actions arising from these checks were followed up.

This inspection took place on 29 October 2015 and was unannounced.

102b Brockhurst Road is registered to offer support and accommodation for up to four people with learning disabilities and or Autism. At the time of our inspection there were three people living at the home. People were accommodated in single rooms, with a shared lounge, kitchen, quiet room, dining room and an enclosed garden. Brockhurst Road is situated next to 102b Brockhurst Road and has the same manager and provider for both services, staff can be called upon from either house to assist if needed.

There was no registered manager in place, however the person in charge of the day to day running of the home has made an application to register and was registered until recently with us for another service run by the same provider.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are “registered persons”. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were appropriate processes and risk assessments in place to protect people from risks to their safety and wellbeing, including the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to recognise and report signs of abuse. Arrangements were in place to keep people safe and comfortable in the event of an emergency evacuation.

The manager made sure there were enough staff with the skills and knowledge to support people safely. Staff stored and administered medicines, including skin creams and ointments, safely. Medicines records, including for medicines prescribed “as required” were accurate and complete.

Staff had the knowledge they required to support people but the training and skills needed were not up to date. The manager had recognised this and a plan was in place to ensure all staff received training to update them.

Staff were aware of the need to obtain people’s consent. When people lacked capacity to make decisions staff were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The service provided individualised, varied and nutritious meals which were prepared and served according to people’s individual needs. People had access to their GP and other healthcare providers when needed.

Staff and the management team had received safeguarding training they were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s safeguarding policy and explain the action they would take if they identified any concerns.

People and staff told us they felt the service was well-led and were positive about the management team. The provider was proactive in promoting good practice, through supervisions and team meetings.

People told us and our observations confirmed that they felt the home was caring. Staff were enthusiastic about working with the people who lived at the home. They were sensitive to people’s individual needs treating them with dignity and respect, and developed caring and positive relationships with them. People were encouraged to maintain their family relationships.

People received care and treatment that met their needs and took into account their wishes and preferences. Staff delivered care and treatment in line with plans and assessments. The service had a procedure in place to manage complaints, but people had not felt the need to use it.

Staff supported people in a variety of individual activities, including trips outside the home and day care services.

People, their families and staff were all complimentary about the atmosphere and culture in the home. People expressed affection for the home and its staff. Staff expressed pride in the service provided, and described it as homely and well run.

The manager had an effective and organised management system. They had completed an audit of the home when they started work there and had developed an action plan. The service manager had also completed an audit and action plan and had found similar issues to be worked on. Work was underway to maintain the quality of the service and to communicate their priorities and values.

There was a thorough and wide ranging system of checks and audits to monitor and assess the quality of service. Actions arising from these checks were followed up.

This inspection took place on 29 October 2015 and was unannounced.

102b Brockhurst Road is registered to offer support and accommodation for up to four people with learning disabilities and or Autism. At the time of our inspection there were three people living at the home. People were accommodated in single rooms, with a shared lounge, kitchen, quiet room, dining room and an enclosed garden. Brockhurst Road is situated next to 102b Brockhurst Road and has the same manager and provider for both services, staff can be called upon from either house to assist if needed.

There was no registered manager in place, however the person in charge of the day to day running of the home has made an application to register and was registered until recently with us for another service run by the same provider.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are “registered persons”. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were appropriate processes and risk assessments in place to protect people from risks to their safety and wellbeing, including the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to recognise and report signs of abuse. Arrangements were in place to keep people safe and comfortable in the event of an emergency evacuation.

The manager made sure there were enough staff with the skills and knowledge to support people safely. Staff stored and administered medicines, including skin creams and ointments, safely. Medicines records, including for medicines prescribed “as required” were accurate and complete.

Staff had the knowledge they required to support people but the training and skills needed were not up to date. The manager had recognised this and a plan was in place to ensure all staff received training to update them.

Staff were aware of the need to obtain people’s consent. When people lacked capacity to make decisions staff were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The service provided individualised, varied and nutritious meals which were prepared and served according to people’s individual needs. People had access to their GP and other healthcare providers when needed.

Staff and the management team had received safeguarding training they were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s safeguarding policy and explain the action they would take if they identified any concerns.

People and staff told us they felt the service was well-led and were positive about the management team. The provider was proactive in promoting good practice, through supervisions and team meetings.

People told us and our observations confirmed that they felt the home was caring. Staff were enthusiastic about working with the people who lived at the home. They were sensitive to people’s individual needs treating them with dignity and respect, and developed caring and positive relationships with them. People were encouraged to maintain their family relationships.

People received care and treatment that met their needs and took into account their wishes and preferences. Staff delivered care and treatment in line with plans and assessments. The service had a procedure in place to manage complaints, but people had not felt the need to use it.

Staff supported people in a variety of individual activities, including trips outside the home and day care services.

People, their families and staff were all complimentary about the atmosphere and culture in the home. People expressed affection for the home and its staff. Staff expressed pride in the service provided, and described it as homely and well run.

The manager had an effective and organised management system. They had completed an audit of the home when they started work there and had developed an action plan. The service manager had also completed an audit and action plan and had found similar issues to be worked on. Work was underway to maintain the quality of the service and to communicate their priorities and values.

There was a thorough and wide ranging system of checks and audits to monitor and assess the quality of service. Actions arising from these checks were followed up.

People who lived at 102b Brockhurst Road had complex needs and some were not able to tell us what they thought about the care and support provided. We spent time in the home observing the support they received. We saw that members of staff were friendly and respectful. Members of staff knew how each person living at the home communicated. This meant there were positive interactions between staff and people living at the home, with the choices of people being respected.

Care plans provided clear details about the care and support each person needed which included individual choices of each person. There were clear details about how people demonstrated their decision making. Where needed assessments were completed about peoples capability to make specified decisions.

We saw that the management of medicines meant that people were protected against the risks associated with medicines.

Staff received appropriate training to equip them with the knowledge and skills to support people who used the service.

We spoke with relatives of three people who lived at the home. They all expressed satisfaction with the care and support their family member received at the home. This included staff respecting the choices of people who lived at the home and staff being able to recognise when a person was not well and effectively support them to access appropriate medical care and treatment. They told us that they had confidence that any concerns or complaints would be dealt with promptly and effectively.

During our visit, there were four people living in the home. Three were out at day care activities. One person that we spoke with indicated they were happy living in the home.

The person told us. “I like running and swimming. I can do that.”

For each person living in the home there was a detailed, person centred plan of care in place that included people’s individual needs and wishes. The plans also contained comprehensive information regarding staff supporting people's emotional wellbeing.

In order to meet people’s individual needs, the home’s staff worked with a variety of healthcare professionals including learning disability and mental health teams. We were shown that advocates and specialist consultants were used where appropriate.

People were protected from risk of abuse or harm by there being safeguarding polices and procedures in place and by staff knowing how and when to use them.

Evidence we saw showed us that people were supported by a caring, experienced staff team. The staff team were well supported and trained.

People had access to a range of activities and outings. Examination of plans showed us that these had been tailored to meet individual needs and wishes.

There was a regular cycle of quality audits undertaken to ensure that the home was kept under review.

Comments from three carers that spoke with us included. “Our son receives very good care and is well looked after. Staff are very understanding and supportive of his Autism.”